Bureau of Materials and Research

2014 AASHTO RAC/TRB Annual Meeting2014 AASHTO RAC/TRB Annual Meeting

From Research Needs to ImplementationFrom Research Needs to Implementation

Glenn Roberts, P.E., Chief of ResearchGlenn Roberts, P.E., Chief of Research

groberts@dot.state.nh.usgroberts@dot.state.nh.us

Small State Perspective

• NHDOT Research - Pre-ISTEA

– No formal research program or processes– All SPR funds controlled by Planning– Occasional ad-hoc research project– Research Engineer position was

established 6 months prior to ISTEA

ISTEA, TEA-21, SAFETEA-LU, MAP-21, …??

• 25% SPR Research Requirement• NHDOT Research Advisory Council

Established 1993• SPR Part I and II independent since 1994• Research Program Certified 1995

PROGRAM

NHDOTRESEARCH

PROGRAM

NHDOTRESEARCH

New Hampshire’s SPR - $800K/year Fed.

How do we remain relevant at only $800,000/year ??

• Focus on Practical, Applied Research • Small projects are typical

70%

5%

20%

How do we remain relevant at only $800,000/year ??

• Use In-house Resources for Support• Research Staff Salaries not SPR funded• Supplement and Leverage SPR Funding

– Other NHDOT funds– Pooled-Fund partnerships– New England Transportation Consortium– FHWA Grant Programs– Other Fed/State Agency Partnerships– NCHRP

Solicitation Process

• Ongoing through Research Website and Word of Mouth

• Announcement 3-4 Months Prior to RAC Meeting– NHDOT Intranet & Newsletter,

Direct Email, Posters

• Better Exposure through Showcases, Posters and Newsletter Articles

NHDOT Research Advisory Council (RAC)

• Generally on 2-year Cycle• ~85% of Research Projects go through RAC

Process• ~60% of Problem Statements Funded• Problem Statements Received:

2004 – 122006 – 112008 – 112010 – 13 2013 – 22

NHDOT Identification/Prioritization Process

• Strengths– RAC is Predisposed to

Practical, Applied Research

– RAC Members Enjoy the Process. Excellent Attendance Record

– Brings Credibility to the SPR Work Program

• Challenges/Opportunities– Process does not Always

Produce Policy or Commissioner-Level Ideas

– Heavy Skew toward Traditional Topics

– Problem Statement Volume is Relatively Low

– Submittal Success Rate too High?

Distribution 2004 - 2010

• Materials – 29%• Pavements – 18%• Maintenance – 13%• Structures – 11%

• Design – 8%• Aeronautics – 8%• Environment – 8%• Traffic/Safety – 5%

More Recently, Projects Initiated to Address:•Industrial Engineering – Review of an NHDOT Bureau’s Business Practices•Statewide Strategic Transit Assessment (includes FTA $)•Statewide Freight Plan (includes SPR Part 1 $)•Mileage Based User Fee

Implementation Keys

• Engage the “Right” Personnel – Beginning/Middle/End– Project Champion & Sponsor

• Clarify Deliverables – Where will we be at the end of this

project?

• Require Implementation Plan for all Projects

Implementation Keys (cont’d)

• Require Project PIs to Engage in Technology Transfer– Presentations– Posters, etc..

• Periodic Review of Implementation Status of All Projects– Need to Institutionalize

• Provide Seed Funding for Implementation

Implementation Obstacles

• Pet Projects, Projects with Insufficient Buy-In or Perceived Benefits– Good Projects Tend to be Self-

Implementing

• Unclear Objectives or Deliverables

• Insufficient Oversight during Project

NHDOT Research in Summary

• Strengths– Size of Agency allows

for Close Relationship with other NHDOT Offices

– Focus on Applied Research

– Control & Flexibility of Program

– Good Rapport with FHWA Division

– Many Success Stories

• Challenges/Opportunities– Not Always Perceived as

Core Element of Agency. Need to Continually Demonstrate Value

– Competing Workload & Priorities – Internal & External Personnel

– Inability to Say “No”. Doing Too Many Things, Not Necessarily Well

– Completing Projects in Timely Manner

Thank you!